- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Sen. Brandon Smith- America's new dumbest Senator
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:31 pm to BugAC
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:31 pm to BugAC
quote:
Oh and spidey, let me know when you are ready to live without all of these products. After all, they are made from petroleum.
Anything that can be made from petroleum can also be made by removing Co2 from the air.
So your point is doubly wrong.
1
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:33 pm to Iosh
quote:
This doesn't prove what you say it does. You're saying that we need to stop traveling and transporting goods entirely to "put a dent" in CO2 production. Transport is 22-32% of the pie depending on your graph. Cutting that by, say, a third, that wouldn't "put a dent" in CO2 production? And transport is the hardest part of the pie to cut. Electricity is 38-41% of the pie. Replacing our coal grid with nuclear (and the non-bullshite renewables where viable) wouldn't put a dent in CO2 production?
I agree. And any legislation put forth by this administration would not put a dent in CO2 production because the fact is, Earth is not impacted enough to cause detrimental global changes by what 4% of the population does.
I agree that we need to be good stewards to our planet for our youth. And that renewable energy sources need to be found because oil and gas are finite. But Democrat legislation (cap and trade) will not do anything but line pockets of politicians. And that is why we are talking about this anyway. Because Al Gore made a movie, and Cap and Trade was proposed.
Now if we want to have a rational discussion on how to better and efficiently produce clean, efficient, energy, then we'd be getting somewhere. But this arguing over where CO2 comes from and who produces what is like arguing over garnish on your steak.
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:33 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
Anything that can be made from petroleum can also be made by removing Co2 from the air.
So your point is doubly wrong.
Such as? And are you telling me that all of your plastic products you use are not petroleum based?
This post was edited on 7/11/14 at 4:34 pm
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:34 pm to BugAC
quote:
and earth produces 768 gigatons per year. Your point?
my point is that the total amount of CO2 we've produced by burning fossil fuels exceeds the amount of CO2 that has been added to the atmosphere since we've starting burning fossil fuels. can you not draw a logical conclusion from that? are you really this dumb?
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:36 pm to Sentrius
quote:
OML practically has the same positions that you and I have with a slight few differences in policy preference. I'm right leaning libertarian, OML may be a left leaning libertarian.
Well he decided to go with personal attacks when he didn't like my positions. He has since stopped posting in the thread, so i am unaware if he was just caught up in the moment or not. But he sure as shite never apologized.
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:37 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
can you not draw a logical conclusion from that? are you really this dumb?
So your point is that Humans produce CO2? I don't think anyone denies that.
Forgive me if i misunderstood, but it appeared as if you were arguing that this CO2 we are producing is leading to climate change.
This post was edited on 7/11/14 at 4:38 pm
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:39 pm to BugAC
quote:
Such as? And are you telling me that all of your plastic products you use are not petroleum based?
no. i'm telling you that they can be made from co2 instead. did you seriously not comprehend that the first time?
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:39 pm to BugAC
quote:
So your point is that Humans produce CO2?
wow.
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:40 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
i'm telling you that they can be made from co2 instead. did you seriously not comprehend that the first time?
Wait, so you mean to tell me that you are on here supporting legislation such as cap and trade, yet you don't follow the same guidelines you preach to others?
Define hypocrisy.
ETA: and Fox, it doesn't look like he's going anywhere anytime soon, however I'll be shuttling off here in a few moments.
This post was edited on 7/11/14 at 4:42 pm
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:47 pm to BugAC
quote:
You claim that "change must be had" to address climate change/global warming/global cooling/whatever bull shite name you want to give it. Your solution is leftist legislation aimed at American energy. America makes up 4% of the human population. Co2, makes up roughly .04% of the atmosphere. America's portion of that .04% is .016%. Now, it's estimated that 4% of that CO2 that is tallied comes from "man made" sources. So that would mean that man made CO2 makes up approximately .0064% of the Earth's atmosphere.
I repeat. America's CO2 output, which is the target here, makes up approximately .0064% of the world's atmosphere. And in your mind, that is why global climate change is happening?
What sort of first-grader logic is at work in your head here?
America can't solve the problem alone -> The problem isn't real!
Unstated axiom: "Nothing can possibly exist that is too big for America."
CO2 is a tiny decimal % of the atmosphere -> CO2 can't be a big deal!
Unstated axiom: "Small percentage of chemicals cannot have large effects."
quote:
no, it hasn't. Humans produce roughly 29 gigatons of CO2, while life forms and planetary activity produce roughly 768 gigatons of CO2.
Talking about the gross and leaving out the net. Some shameful shite
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:48 pm to Sentrius
about what I expected...anyway 
check out the spidermantuba math
check out the spidermantuba math
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:48 pm to Iosh
quote:
America can't solve the problem alone -> The problem isn't real!
That's BugAC's way of admitting he actually agrees with the science.
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:49 pm to BugAC
but he won't address his results
I want to know how difficult compounding interest was for him if he indeed did go to Tulane
I want to know how difficult compounding interest was for him if he indeed did go to Tulane
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:52 pm to DelU249
quote:
I want to know how difficult compounding interest was for him if he indeed did go to Tulane
Are you suggesting that the amount of Co2 man burns is in direct proportion to the amount in the atmosphere?
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:53 pm to DelU249
quote:
a years worth of carbon emissions is 1 and yet after trillions of years the earth's atmospheric carbon is 1
You do understand that almost all natural emissions come from renewable sources, right? Do you even know what the frick I'm talking about?
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:54 pm to BugAC
I'll leave you with this Tuba, since i'm jetting out of here.
Your posts are not consistent. You argue one thing, then you argue another.
My point the entire time is that man made CO2 is not causing global climate change. I do not believe that we produce enough CO2, at this point, to change earth's thermostat. I believe thinking that we do control our thermostate, is arrogant and ignorant, and is purely a means to pass a political agenda.
These debates we get in have sprung from a couple things. Al Gore's movie, and Cap and Trade. That's why we make these arguments. That's why the debates are heated. Because you, and others on the left, are going out of your way to try to prove something that isn't scientifically provable.
1) Is CO2 the #1 contributing factor to Earth's temperature?
2) Is the 3.7% of man made CO2 produced by the global population of humans, enough to overried the 97% of CO2 that occurs naturally.
3) Is there political gain to be had by exploiting "global warming"?
4) Do we have enough historical evidence to identify an outlier that coorelates with Earth's global temperature?
5) Is a global climate change actually occurring and if so, what is the evidence?
6) If that climate change is occurring, then shouldn't basic science allow for multiple theories and reasoning to make an informed decision on what is actually the cause?
7) Is the data from the left being enticed by a specific agenda?
8) Is that data steered towards a preconceived outcome?
9) Could it possibly be, that if Earth is indeed in the beginnings of a climate change, rather great or small, that it could be due to natural processes, just like every single other weather event?
Your posts are not consistent. You argue one thing, then you argue another.
My point the entire time is that man made CO2 is not causing global climate change. I do not believe that we produce enough CO2, at this point, to change earth's thermostat. I believe thinking that we do control our thermostate, is arrogant and ignorant, and is purely a means to pass a political agenda.
These debates we get in have sprung from a couple things. Al Gore's movie, and Cap and Trade. That's why we make these arguments. That's why the debates are heated. Because you, and others on the left, are going out of your way to try to prove something that isn't scientifically provable.
1) Is CO2 the #1 contributing factor to Earth's temperature?
2) Is the 3.7% of man made CO2 produced by the global population of humans, enough to overried the 97% of CO2 that occurs naturally.
3) Is there political gain to be had by exploiting "global warming"?
4) Do we have enough historical evidence to identify an outlier that coorelates with Earth's global temperature?
5) Is a global climate change actually occurring and if so, what is the evidence?
6) If that climate change is occurring, then shouldn't basic science allow for multiple theories and reasoning to make an informed decision on what is actually the cause?
7) Is the data from the left being enticed by a specific agenda?
8) Is that data steered towards a preconceived outcome?
9) Could it possibly be, that if Earth is indeed in the beginnings of a climate change, rather great or small, that it could be due to natural processes, just like every single other weather event?
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:56 pm to BugAC
quote:
I do not believe that we produce enough CO2, at this point, to change earth's thermostat.
That's the problem.
You think its a matter of belief.
That's why evidence is irrelevant to you.
Your also a moron.
This post was edited on 7/11/14 at 4:56 pm
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:57 pm to Iosh
quote:
Iosh
Go back and read all of my posts before making your assumptions about me. and look at my last post. I'm simply stating that the espousing of a belief that earth is cooling 100% directly because of CO2, is ignorant, and unfounded.
And again, ask yourself why we are even talking about Climate Change today to begin with? Is it for political gain or for the sake of being good stewards to Earth?
I will see you fellas on Monday.
Posted on 7/11/14 at 4:57 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
Your also a moron.
Tuba, you've already admitted several times you lost the argument, no need to reinforce that fact.
Posted on 7/11/14 at 5:03 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
1+
1.03+
1.06+
1.09+
1.12+
1.15+
1.18+
1.21+
1.24+
1.27+
1.30+
1.33+
1.36+
1.39+
1.42+
1.45+
1.48+
1.51+
1.54+
1.57+
1.60+
1.63+
1.66+
1.69+
1.72+
1.75+
1.78+
1.81+
1.84+
1.87+
1.90+
1.93+
1.96+
-------------
= 1.99
I'd like to say I've never met anyone as dumb as you Fox, but I wouldn't want to hurt BugAC's feelings.
it's like a work of art...I could probably crank out 10 pages on how fricking stupid this individual post is...it's amazing. TD history. 
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News